From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Lee Trager" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Backport for 2.6.27 and 2.6.26 on the experimental branch Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 15:36:29 -0500 Message-ID: <20090224203629.GB12209@tux64-01> References: <20090220174518.GA23955@tux64-01> <499EF58F.6020807@hp.com> <20090223222304.GB13878@tux64-01> <49A41F26.2020202@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Lee Trager , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: jim owens Return-path: In-Reply-To: <49A41F26.2020202@hp.com> List-ID: I ran a few tests that Jim suggested and found that btrfs works fine on 2.6.26 as long as there are only 23 or less files on the file system. Anymore and I experience the lockup. Jim and I will be working to find a solution but if anyone else has any clues that would be greatly appreciated. Lee On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 11:24:06AM -0500, jim owens wrote: > Lee Trager wrote: >> The more and more I look at this problem the more I tend to think that >> the issue is because of some change in the way the VFS or something >> interacts with the file system. Does anyone know of any big changes? Why >> is the inode being marked dirty? Is there some kind of read error. I'm >> completly lost in solving this problem. > > Being a filesystem guy, I always try blaming vm or drivers :) > > Until someone with real experience gives us the answer, > I'll work with you off the mailing list to try to narrow > down why this is happening. > > jim